Screen Accuracy first

First, it is a FACT that we can have both. But it is also a FACT that in many transformers toys, we DON'T have both.

Screen Accuracy is defined as being as accurate to the model used in the movies, artwork, cartoon, and the like.

Design Praticality is defined by making the mold, "work". This includes stability, posability, transformation, proportions.

So given a scenario where you have to prioritize one over the other (and this trade-off is often part of the design process), which one would you prefer in your transformers toys, and why?

**There are no wrong posts, its merely opinions. I feel that this is a preference that we can come together and discuss without beating on each other or sounding superior**
----------------------

My Answer:

Personally, I prefer design practicality. To me, it doesn't matter if a toy is screen accurate, as long as the toy looks badass. One strange example that comes to me in my recent endeavors, is the DOTM Voyager optimus prime. It's a "shitty mold" when it comes to screen accuracy, but its pretty decent for practical design. Its got good posability, looks great, and is very stable, etc.

In rare cases, you have a figure that succeeds massively on both criteria, but is then rejected by fans anyway for some or another reason. Witness Animated Leader Megatron ("too simple"). Or there's Universe Cyclonus, who belts it out of the park for design practicality as you define it and is screen accurate in one mode.

Since my figures spend the vast majority of their time on static display, I tend to favor screen accuracy, so they actually look like what they theoretically depict. As long as it's relatively stable and posable, I can forgive it even if it look forever to transform. "Practical" toys I tend to fiddle with more of course, but I don't need all of my figures to be good for fiddling.

Although I would want screen accuracy, its still got to be fun IMO. Also, sometimes screen accuracy isn't all it cracks up to be, the Rodimus in the BIS set technically has the accurate colours yet its colours are vastly inferior to the original guy.

Having said that the original guys colours aren't great either... hence my reprolabeling him many moons ago.

I am well aware of those facts. I am just wondering if people want to change pose, they can always use models. If its that you want to change modes as you display them, I suppose that makes it logical.

I guess the reason why I wondered about that, is that certain screen models can't possibily translate into a well made toy without sacrificing practicality or accuracy.

One of the molds I thought about was movie sideswipe. I think if he was completely accurate to certain scenes, he would need help standing.

I'd rather have a figure that looks good in BOTH modes and bears a more than obvious resemblance to a character in robot mode (design practicality) than a figure that only looks good (aka screen accurate) in one mode but is full of limitations.

I think the majority of Classics/Universe fall into the design practicality camp, some main examples being Bumblebee, Cyclonus, Rodimus, Mirage, Hound, Perceptor, Sunstreaker, etc. All of them have undergone engineering & cosmetic changes, but it's obvious who they are and their toys don't suffer from trying to only achieve one accurate mode. I'd take that any day over a perfect G1 accurate bot mode that looks like ass in alt mode.

I'd rather have a figure that looks good in BOTH modes and bears a more than obvious resemblance to a character in robot mode (design practicality) than a figure that only looks good (aka screen accurate) in one mode but is full of limitations.

I think the majority of Classics/Universe fall into the design practicality camp, some main examples being Bumblebee, Cyclonus, Rodimus, Mirage, Hound, Perceptor, Sunstreaker, etc. All of them have undergone engineering & cosmetic changes, but it's obvious who they are and their toys don't suffer from trying to only achieve one accurate mode. I'd take that any day over a perfect G1 accurate bot mode that looks like ass in alt mode.

II think the majority of Classics/Universe fall into the design practicality camp, some main examples being Bumblebee, Cyclonus, Rodimus, Mirage, Hound, Perceptor, Sunstreaker, etc. All of them have undergone engineering & cosmetic changes, but it's obvious who they are and their toys don't suffer from trying to only achieve one accurate mode. I'd take that any day over a perfect G1 accurate bot mode that looks like ass in alt mode.

Click to expand...

Although I do love RTS Perceptor, I wouldn't put him as design practical, his robot mode is quite awkward and difficult to stand or pose.

That being said, in movie figures I like them as screen-accurate as possible, but I'm not going to shun ones that are still cool figures. Deluxe Optimus, for example, is one of my favourite DOTM toys, yet isn't terribly screen-accurate, but there's no way I'd choose DOTM Voyager Optimus over HFTD Voyager Optimus.

I don't always follow cartoon and such so if the toy looks good and transformation is fun, I'm happy I love Recon Ironhide, even though Ironhide never looked like that in the movie, that is a toy version of the character, and a bloody good one.

Having said that, TFA toys are awesome because they are mostly accurate and great toys. I can appreciate that.

I'm sort of in the middle road here. Take HFTD Leader/Masterpiece Movie Starscream. Arguably he's the definitive Starscream figure from the movies. Great articulation and screen accuracy, he's built solidly and tough, has a pretty good alt mode, and is fun to fiddle with to boot.

That said, he's not 100% screen accurate (his chest area had to be compromised a bit for the sake of transformation), some articulation is missing due to fragility/budgetary/safety reasons (wrist swivels, finger articulation), his alt mode is a bit fat with its undercarriage (still looks reasonably good as an F-22 Raptor), and some transformation engineering was compromised to make room for electronic light and sound gimmicks.

Still, he's one of my favorite Transformers toys ever created and the fact he's not 100% accurate leaves room for custom mod improvement (which I find fun, personally), or for third parties to make a cool add-on for it (such as the FansWantIt boosters/buzzsaw kit).

My favorite figure is Sidearm Sideswipe because, apart from his pretty red paint apps, he's screen-accurate in both modes, AND has a more or less screen-accurate transformation. He's proof that within the movie line, accuracy and design practicality can work together. Overall, though, I prefer screen-accuracy. I'm generally a fan of complicated transformations so long as they're not ridiculously over-complicated.

i prefer a balance of both in a toy. That being said the more important is practicality. Use DOTM Sentinel as an example. The leader looks awesome and the transformation is not bad once you get through the learning curve. That being said he is not my favorite mold of the character because even with the batteries out he is still back heavy. The voyager is not as poseable but has a fun transformation and his back kibble actually makes a great counter balance to the huge gun and it is overall a figure that i enjoy more. Same with the Cyberverse SP. Not as screen accurate as the leader but its a more enjoyable toy due to how well it was designed.